Baptist "Press" has two articles of note today (that's two more than normal).
First is the "No Beer at NCAA 'Kind of Fun'" article. This has to do with SBC life in what way? I agree that basketball games without drunk frat guys are better, but this is clearly on BP as anti-alcohol prop-A-ganda. Probably meant to bolster the second article, "Alcohol, Acts 29 and the SBC."
My favorite quote...
The emerging church movement is diverse and difficult to generalize. However, the mix of influences includes: postmodernism (a focus on sense-making through the various mediums of culture); Calvinism ala John Piper; and for some, Christian liberty, as granted by their scriptural interpretation, to drink alcohol and engage in other cultural activities that many Southern Baptists eschew based on opposing scriptural interpretation.
Which passages would THAT interpretation come from? Anyone?
un stinkin' believable. that peeves me for the reason that you mention: propaganda. seriously, there is always going to be bias in any "news" medium, but this is ridiculously blatant. thanks for the "watch dog" report, steve. *sigh*
Posted by: Adam L. Feldman | 03/20/2007 at 08:38 PM
Did anyone else notice that Norm uses the TODAY show as "gospel" for the story about the Journey. The TODAY show for crying out loud! Since when does Baptist press (free lance writer or otherwise) take the NBC TODAY show as always truthful....what, don't you think the mainstream media would want to HYPE the beer - sbc connection...and Norm and BP is seem to trust EVERYTHING NBC TODAY says....hey where Dan Rather, maybe he could get a gig free lance writing for BP.
Posted by: jm clifton | 03/20/2007 at 08:49 PM
When I first saw the title of your post, I thought it read, "Reasons Why I Hate U2."
Man, you would have seriously crossed the line with that one. Other than that, I have nothing of substance to say on the SBC stuff. I am no longer surprised or shocked. Actually, I have no reaction whatsoever. If opposite of love is not hate, but indifference, I am just about there.
Posted by: Alan Cross | 03/20/2007 at 09:42 PM
The alcohol issue goes straight to the top at Acts 29, whose president, Mark Driscoll -- who is pastor of the Seattle-area Mars Hill Church -- wrote in his book, “Radical Reformission,” that abstinence from alcohol is a sin.
I don't recall that statement at all. This is an outright deception!
Posted by: Michael Foster | 03/20/2007 at 09:51 PM
"Calvinism ala John Piper"??? Have they heard what John Piper has said about the Emerging Church Movement? Amazing... and I'm certain that many in the ECM to not adhere to the doctrines of grace. To me this is a 3-fold attack:
1. The ECM
2. Calvinism
3. Of course, alcohol (yawn)...
Posted by: Nick Kennicott | 03/20/2007 at 10:02 PM
Steve,
Also, if you know how I can contact the BP, I'd love that info. Thanks.
Posted by: Michael Foster | 03/20/2007 at 10:03 PM
Michael, their email is [email protected]. I don't remember a Driscoll quote like that either, but I didn't want to challenge it without finding out what they are quoting. Of course it's a lot of quoting without quoting for them.
Nick, well said. The fact they put Calvinism in there is so ridiculous I just don't know what to say about it. But the propaganda machine does that sort of thing.
Thanks for the comments all.
Posted by: Steve McCoy | 03/21/2007 at 12:36 AM
Steve,
At church Shawn and I play a little game on Thursdays when our newspaper comes from the state convention. We each read it separately and then meet to compare notes to see what was silly, what was blatant propaganda, and what just makes us mad. It is fun and maddening at the same time.
I have to say thanks for the post and sharing the info. I just think all this is getting silly. I am wondering when cooler heads will prevail. Its getting old.
Michael
Posted by: michael mcminn | 03/21/2007 at 02:06 AM
Driscoll does not, anywhere in the chapter cited, call abstentation a sin. What he does say is that his own personal teetotalism was sinful. That's it.
Posted by: Stephen Newell | 03/21/2007 at 04:17 AM
"Patrick, who is vice president of Acts 29, an association of emergent churches . . ."
Emergent churches? Really? I don't think McLaren or T. Jones would appreciate that one.
Was Roger Moran the ghost writer of this article? Notice the jabs of GBA with Ware and SEBTS.
I don't want to assign motives to BP, but one has to wonder why in the world they put such propaganda on their website.
Maybe the next first person article will argue that a person's position on alcohol is a matter of orthodoxy (because you know, it's gotta be in the BF&M somewhere).
Posted by: Timmy Brister | 03/21/2007 at 07:42 AM
Go ahead and assign motives! This is ridiculous. I am sure some one will try and put abstinence in the BF&M before it is over.
Posted by: perry mccall | 03/21/2007 at 09:52 AM
As a fan of beer and the Acts29 network, I actually found the article to be pretty fair. Other than getting some important facts wrong (and I'm sure those of you to whom this is a sensitive issue see those slips ups not as mistakes, but as deceptive)I thought the article simply served as a primer for the issue. There was an obvious (and in my opinion unintended) slant in one direction, but from an outsider who has no ties to the SBC, I thought it wasn't a "slam" article.
Posted by: matt | 03/21/2007 at 10:13 AM
I wonder how Curtis "Voice" Allen would counsel us to respond to Moran, BP and others of that sort.
Posted by: UberGoober | 03/21/2007 at 10:46 AM
"other cultural activities" ?
dancin' - playin' face cards - piture shows - snuff dippin' - NIV (Nearly Inspired Version) readin', etc.?
Posted by: Matt Snowden | 03/21/2007 at 11:20 AM
Why do I read BP anymore?
matt,
The reason it gets some of us upset is because of what is going on in the SBC. This is a broad brush stroke against the Emergent Church, Acts 29, The Journey and anyone like them. It is a rallying cry for those died in wool SBCers who hate alcohol and think abstaining is the only biblical way, to rally against anything that looks or smells different that what they have always done. Who cares that those that are apart of Acts 29 and Mars Hill are probably more biblical, community minded, and servant hearted than most SBC churches. They drink beer so to hell with all of them.
I guess since the battle of the Bible has been won in the SBC there is a new battle, "The Battle of the Brewery."
Welch's anyone?
Anyone have a barf bag?
Posted by: Chris Walls | 03/21/2007 at 01:51 PM
Stephen, thanks for the clarification on what Driscoll actually said.
Matt, it was written to appear fair and it doesn't surprise me that an outsider might see it that way. But for insiders the meaning of this article is pretty clear.
Posted by: Steve McCoy | 03/21/2007 at 02:12 PM
The SBC is a Byzantine organization who's days are numbered.
Posted by: Paul | 03/21/2007 at 04:34 PM
So someone with an an anti-missional agenda not only mis-contextualizes Driscoll's line about teetotalism to fit their agenda, but they also go into the culture via the secular media for their information on which to base their objections?
Interesting...
Mark
Posted by: johnMark | 03/21/2007 at 04:35 PM
Ubergoober,
I don't know how "Voice" would counsel us to respond since none of the BP stuff is personally attacking us or leveling criticism against us personally but simply promoting and propagating an very lopsided view of a debatable issue as if it not at all debatable.
Steve two questions,
One: I noticed that the BP article refered to Moran as a member of the X-Comm. Is this true? Or did he just try to make his case to the X-Comm? (I was shocked and somehow had missed this about him if it is true.)
Two: One question I see alot from the total abstinence side is "What parents do in moderation their children will do in excess?" I have not seen this discussed or addressed from those who hold to moderation. How would you respond to that?
Michael
Posted by: michael mcminn | 03/22/2007 at 02:24 AM
Michael,
Moran is an X-conn member.
http://www.sbcec.org/roster/members.asp
Mark
Posted by: johnMark | 03/22/2007 at 06:30 AM
"One question I see alot from the total abstinence side is "What parents do in moderation their children will do in excess?" I have not seen this discussed or addressed from those who hold to moderation. How would you respond to that?"
Maybe this explains the childhood obesity problem in the U.S. today. Parents are eating in moderation and thier kids are doing it in excess. I guess to not have so many fat kids is for thier parents to completely give up eating.
On a more serious note, How is that question Biblical in any way?
Posted by: Arlovski | 03/22/2007 at 11:53 AM
As far as the BP is concerned… it is nothing more than a “Political Rag” that is mostly good for wrapping mullet in.
I made this comment over on Tom Ascol's Blog so I just had to make it here as well...
Posted by: Greg Alford | 03/22/2007 at 02:51 PM